Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Greece v United Kingdom [1952] ICJ 1 (also called the Ambatielos Case) is a public international law case, concerning state responsibility for economic damage. The International Court of Justice held that the UK had to enter into arbitration under the terms of a treaty it had made with Greece, although the ICJ itself held it had no jurisdiction to hear and decide upon the substantive dispute ...
Full case name: An Arbitration before an arbitral tribunal constituted under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea between the Republic of Mauritius and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland : Decided: March 18, 2015: Court membership; Judges sitting: Professor Ivan Shearer (President) [1]
The main body of law applicable to arbitration is normally contained either in the national Private International Law Act (as is the case in Switzerland) or in a separate law on arbitration (as is the case in England, Republic of Korea and Jordan [24]). In addition to this, a number of national procedural laws may also contain provisions ...
Permanent Court of Arbitration cases (12 P) Pig War (1859) (7 P) U. United States arbitration case law (48 P) Pages in category "Arbitration cases"
The cyclists claimed before the UK government appointed Central Arbitration Committee that they should be recognised. The CAC argued they were not workers because they could provide substitutes and, in its view, this meant that they did not "personally perform work", as is necessary to be a "worker" under TULRCA 1992 section 296.
The case summaries below are not official or authoritative. Unless otherwise noted, cases were heard by a panel of 5 judges. Cases involving Scots law are highlighted in orange. Cases involving Northern Irish law are highlighted in green. List of judgments of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom delivered in 2009
The arbitrators of the case, by a majority, decided in favour of Mercator. They held that the loss from getting a lower price on the next chartering contract was within the first rule in Hadley v Baxendale [3] as arising "naturally, i.e. according to the usual course of things, from such breach of contract itself".
The Malaysia Sulu case is an international legal dispute in which persons claiming to be heirs of the Sultanate of Sulu made claims against the government of Malaysia by way of arbitration. The claims were subsequently litigated in the Spanish, French, and Dutch court systems. [ 1 ]